*       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

 *       String}.
 * </ul>
 *
 * This is the same behavior as type-variable usages have to Kotlin and to the Checker Framework.
 * Contrast the method above to:
 *
 * <ul>
 *   <li>methods whose return type is a type variable but which can never return {@code null},
 *       typically because the type forbids nullable type arguments: For example, {@code

    }

    public void test_logout_withNullUser() {
        // Setup
        authenticator.setLogoutUrl("https://example.com/logout");

        // Execute
        String result = authenticator.logout(null);

        // Verify
        assertNotNull(result);
        assertEquals("https://example.com/logout", result);
        assertNull(authenticator.getLastLogoutUser());
    }

import com.google.common.util.concurrent.ListenableFuture;
import java.util.concurrent.CountDownLatch;
import java.util.concurrent.ExecutionException;
import junit.framework.Assert;

/**
 * A simple mock implementation of {@code Runnable} that can be used for testing ListenableFutures.
 *
 * @author Nishant Thakkar
 * @since 10.0
 */
@GwtIncompatible
public class MockFutureListener implements Runnable {

     */
    public boolean encloses(ArtifactScopeEnum scope) {
        final ArtifactScopeEnum s = checkScope(scope);

        // system scope is historic only - and simple
        if (id == system.id) {
            return scope.id == system.id;
        }

        for (ArtifactScopeEnum[][] set : COMPLIANCY_SETS) {
            if (id == set[0][0].id) {

{* ../../docs_src/openapi_webhooks/tutorial001.py hl[9:13,36:53] *}

The webhooks that you define will end up in the **OpenAPI** schema and the automatic **docs UI**.

/// info

The `app.webhooks` object is actually just an `APIRouter`, the same type you would use when structuring your app with multiple files.

You could also use `from starlette.responses import JSONResponse`.

**FastAPI** provides the same `starlette.responses` as `fastapi.responses` just as a convenience for you, the developer. But most of the available responses come directly from Starlette.

///

## Returning a custom `Response` { #returning-a-custom-response }